9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, since the Appellants were not aware about the change of procedure for filing the quarterly return instead of half yearly and this being merely a procedural lapse, substantial justice cannot be denied. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 70743 of 2017 - FINAL ORDER NO. 72249/2018 - Dated:- 30-1-2018 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore 25.11.2012. Thus, they contravened the provision of Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Accordingly, show cause notice dated 30.08.2014 was issued for imposing penalty and recovering late for such contravention. The said notice was adjudicated vide impugned order and the Appellants were directed to pay late fee of ₹ 11,800/-. Being aggri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10/2012. Since software was not visible on sight of aces the return was delivered in the office of Superintendent, Service Tax under acknowledgment which clearly shows that the they were not having any intimation/ communication that periodicity of return had been changed from half yearly to quarterly. The Superintendent, Service Tax also did not bother to intimate them that the return, so submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly return ending 9/2012 already submitted on 18/10/2012 was bifurcated in 2 quarters ending 06/2012 and 09/2012 covering the period from 04/2012 to 06/2012 and 07/2012 to 09/2012 separately. ( d) Prior to April, 2013 the Appellant was never informed that only Quarterly returns would be acceptable. Had the letter dated 18/10/2012 of the Appellant vide which half yearly retu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
